• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Obama's lost year at Columbia, its murky, will it be a campaign issue..

Travis007

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2012
Messages
13,375
Reaction score
1,611
Location
NJ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Obama’s ‘missing year’ at Columbia found?


snip......

Did he attend classes at Columbia?

Henry Franklin Graff, professor emeritus of history at Columbia for 46 years, has cast doubt on claims Obama attended classes at the New York City university.


Henry Franklin Graff
“I have no recollection of Barack Obama at Columbia, and I am sure he never attended any of my classes,” Graff told WND in a telephone interview.

“For 46 years, I taught political history, diplomatic history and one of the pioneering courses on presidential history, and every future politician of note who went through Columbia in those years took one or more of my classes – every one, that is, except Barack Obama.”

Graff further told WND no professor he knew could remember having Obama as a student at Columbia.

“Nobody I knew at Columbia ever remembers Obama being there,” Graff insisted.

The undocumented student

On Nov. 5, 2008, Columbia University celebrated Obama’s election as president by publishing an article in Columbia News titled “Barack Obama, CC ’83, First Columbia Graduate Elected President of the United States.”

“Obama attended Columbia College from 1981 to 1983, after transferring in his junior year from Occidental College,” the article read in part.

In his 2010 biography of Obama, “The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama,” journalist David Remnick states on pages 112-113 that Obama moved to New York City in the summer of 1981 to co-occupy an apartment at 142 West 109th Street, off Amsterdam Avenue, with Occidental friend Phil Boerner.

Remnick does not provide footnotes to document the claims, however.

Two pages later, Remnick recounts how on the night of Nov. 24, 1982, Obama’s father was killed driving drunk in Nairobi, “during Obama’s first semester of his senior year at Columbia,” with the assumption this was Obama’s second academic year at Columbia.
Remnick footnotes the passage regarding the death of Obama’s father on page 215 with a reference to an article by Jon Meacham titled “On His Own,” published in Newsweek Sept. 1, 2008.

Meacham’s mention of Obama attending Columbia is so limited that he fails to specify the amount of time Obama spent attending classes at the university.

In his 2012 biography of Obama, “Barack Obama: The Story,” author and editor David Maraniss recounts, beginning on page 418, an Obama move to New York City on Aug. 25, 1981, “a week before orientation day at Columbia College.”


David Maraniss
On pages 465-466, Maraniss writes of Obama’s last month at Columbia, May 1983:

[Obama] had received mostly A’s in his coursework during those two years, he said later, and finished with a 3.7 grade point average. Including his two years at Occidental, his college education had cost about fifty thousand dollars for the four years and was a family effort. About half came from scholarships and student loans, a bit from the off-the-books part-time summer jobs, and most of the rest from his grandmother, Tut, who had devoted part of her salary each year to his education.

Although the passage is not accompanied by a footnote, the reference “he said later” suggests Maraniss got the information from Obama himself or from interviews in which Obama presented the information.

The “off-the-books” part-time summer employment is unlikely to be independently verified. Nor does Maraniss produce any Columbia transcript or reference to a transcript that would document the grade-point average. Maraniss also fails to provide or reference any Columbia financial records that might have given insight into the source or sources Obama used to pay tuition.

Columbia: ‘Obama’s lost years’

No less than Obama-supporting Snopes.com has admitted little is known about Obama’s Columbia years.

“Even those who have studied Barack Obama’s background in detail don’t generally know much about his time at Columbia University, however, as he hasn’t revealed much about that period of his life in his public writings and statements, nor has he made his transcripts or other school records from Columbia available for public examination,” the website states.

An editorial titled “Obama’s Lost Years,” published in the Wall Street Journal Sept. 11, 2008, noted Fox News contacted some 400 students who were at Columbia from 1981 to 1983 and found no one who remembered him.

New York Times reporter Janny Scott, who later wrote a favorable biography of Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, wrote in an Oct. 30, 2007, story that Obama “declined repeated requests to talk about his New York years, release his Columbia transcript or identify even a single fellow student, co-worker, roommate or friend from those years.”

“He doesn’t remember the names of a lot of people in his life,” said Ben LaBolt, a campaign spokesman, told Scott.

Scott wrote that one person who did remember Obama was Michael L. Baron, who taught a senior seminar on international politics and American policy. Baron said he was Obama’s adviser on the senior thesis for that course and gave him an A for the course. Baron later wrote Obama a recommendation for Harvard Law School.

An Associated Press story May 16, 2008, also stated the Obama campaign declined to discuss Obama’s “time at Columbia and his friendships in general.”

The campaign, however, listed five locations where Obama lived during a period of four years in New York City: three on Manhattan’s Upper West Side and two in Brooklyn. His memoir mentions two others on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, the AP noted.

snip.....
 
Last edited:
a) WND? Really?

b) For a guy who's been president for four years... this is what you consider a campaign issue? Seriously?
 
Its an issue because its still "murky"...

did you think the yellow rag NY Times would look into this ?...and its well sourced if you read the article and ongoing
 
Last edited:
a) WND? Really?

b) For a guy who's been president for four years... this is what you consider a campaign issue? Seriously?

LOLOLOL.. WND? much like DEBKA or Press TV.
 
No, it won't be a "campaign" issue. The Romney can't would be idiotic to bring it up. The only good it'd do them is heighten the fervor of the base, which will conversely heighten the fervor of the opposing base. It would do next to nothing for independents and may drive them away given the FAR larger issues on the table.

Will it be used by hyper partisans and idiotic commentators on the right who will reach for everything and anything to piss, moan, bitch, whine, scheme, and blather on about in hopes of riling up the base? Sure. And it'll be mostly ignored or mocked by anyone that isn't essentially a fervant drone of the GOP. For a party that commentator Rush Limbaugh claims runs on "ideas" and "policy"....this kind of **** is far too common and far too idiotic in it's use. This isn't policy, this isn't ideas, this is emotional politicing, nothing more.
 
LOLOLOL.. WND? much like DEBKA or Press TV.

again.. the Wall Street Journal is legit..

and that you are so blind to this horrible fraud Barry Hussein Sotero is up to you.. too much smoke here .. there is somehting horribly unsettling about this POS we have a President..
 
No, it won't be a "campaign" issue. The Romney can't would be idiotic to bring it up. The only good it'd do them is heighten the fervor of the base, which will conversely heighten the fervor of the opposing base. It would do next to nothing for independents and may drive them away given the FAR larger issues on the table.

Will it be used by hyper partisans and idiotic commentators on the right who will reach for everything and anything to piss, moan, bitch, whine, scheme, and blather on about in hopes of riling up the base? Sure. And it'll be mostly ignored or mocked by anyone that isn't essentially a fervant drone of the GOP. For a party that commentator Rush Limbaugh claims runs on "ideas" and "policy"....this kind of **** is far too common and far too idiotic in it's use. This isn't policy, this isn't ideas, this is emotional politicing, nothing more.

I agree .I dont think Romney will go after it directly, but I think that others supporting Romney, like a Palin or Trump, etc,,, Id like to see them get this into the discussion of this total fraud..
 
I'm still unclear why you think it's relevant to go back to the college years when the man's been president for four years now. I would look at his record, instead of indulging in unhinged conspiracy theories which certainly don't make anybody pushing them look a) reasonable or b) like an attractive alternative to Obama.
 
I can't believe people are still going on about this crap. Give it a rest.
 
I can't believe people are still going on about this crap. Give it a rest.


NO..its an election yea.. I want my country BACK... we need more talk of who this fraud in the Whitehouse is and the destruction he is doing and will do..
 
I'm still unclear why you think it's relevant to go back to the college years when the man's been president for four years now. I would look at his record, instead of indulging in unhinged conspiracy theories which certainly don't make anybody pushing them look a) reasonable or b) like an attractive alternative to Obama.

its part of the mosiac of this fraud.. this Soros sock puppet..
 
This is Romney's clear path to victory: focus on Obama's college transcripts and birth certificate. :lol:
 
I agree .I dont think Romney will go after it directly, but I think that others supporting Romney, like a Palin or Trump, etc,,, Id like to see them get this into the discussion of this total fraud..

Which will further highlight the ridiculousness of those individuals and does go back to my point that, election wise, it's pretty irrelevant. This is the same idiot that helped lead the Birther Charge (in Trump) and the person who enabled Birthers (Palin) that we're talking about. It wouldn't shock me that they latch onto this idiocy anymore than it'd shock me to hear Alex Jones rant about some conspiracy or Rachel Maddow to go rabid over some idiotic non-issue thing of Romney.
 
Go back to your college, and see how many professors recall your attendance record in each of their classes that you claim to have attended. 30 years later, I'm sure that they all have a great recollection of you, and remember each and every class you attended.

Wall Street Journal is legit (which any con should recognize, since it was bought by Murdoch). WND is closer to Pravda.
 
No, it won't be a "campaign" issue. The Romney can't would be idiotic to bring it up. The only good it'd do them is heighten the fervor of the base, which will conversely heighten the fervor of the opposing base. It would do next to nothing for independents and may drive them away given the FAR larger issues on the table.

Will it be used by hyper partisans and idiotic commentators on the right who will reach for everything and anything to piss, moan, bitch, whine, scheme, and blather on about in hopes of riling up the base? Sure. And it'll be mostly ignored or mocked by anyone that isn't essentially a fervant drone of the GOP. For a party that commentator Rush Limbaugh claims runs on "ideas" and "policy"....this kind of **** is far too common and far too idiotic in it's use. This isn't policy, this isn't ideas, this is emotional politicing, nothing more.

It does explain why he's an idiot though, he missed the necessary course that would have made up some of the difference. :lol:
 
Go back to your college, and see how many professors recall your attendance record in each of their classes that you claim to have attended. 30 years later, I'm sure that they all have a great recollection of you, and remember each and every class you attended.

Wall Street Journal is legit (which any con should recognize, since it was bought by Murdoch). WND is closer to Pravda.

Oh Im sure some would...... but why is it always Obama... ? we just saw in the vetting he had "Born in Kenya" in his bio that he approved, but now.. thats a big mistake.. like his time with Rev Wright and Farakan, Odinga.. Khalidi.. and Soros, and Phlager, and Rezko, and Van Jones.. and Frank Marshal Davis...... and Ayers... it goes on and on..and the New Party....

but nothing to see here.. everyone is making it up..Obama is a victim.. oh wait Obama needs victims to save...

something just is not right with the piece of "American Pie"...
 
Last edited:
Its an issue because its still "murky"...

did you think the yellow rag NY Times would look into this ?...and its well sourced if you read the article and ongoing

I find it ironic that you think a bunch of generic links are "well sourced" while the article is one more sucker to peg snopes with some liberal bias when the snopes article was the only reasonable reference (out of context of course) in the entire article (it has TEN references to well know sources).

In the end, this is just an example that any idiot can register a domain name for 12 bucks a year. I think we should go after his Bar exam results next .
 
Back
Top Bottom